docs-auditlisted

# Docs Audit ## Goal Find documentation gaps that block users, contributors, maintainers, or agents from understanding, installing, validating, and safely changing the repository. ## When to use - The user asks whether docs are clear, complete, current, or public-ready. - README, examples, onboarding, API docs, or contribution docs need review. - Documentation promises may have drifted from actual code and commands. ## When not to use - The user asks for a full repo maintenance audit; use `repo-health-audit`. - The user wants release notes; use `release-manager`. - The user wants prose editing only and no repo evidence check. ## Inputs to inspect - README, docs, examples, changelog, contributing guide, security policy, and license. - Package scripts, CLI help, config examples, and source files that docs mention. - Internal links, install commands, screenshots, and generated docs. ## Review rubric Check audience fit, first-run path, command accuracy, link integrity, examples, maintenance docs, public safety, and agent usability. Read `references/docs-rubric.md` for details. ## Workflow 1. Identify the intended audiences and main user journeys. 2. Compare README promises with actual files and commands. 3. Verify install, validate, and usage examples where practical. 4. Check internal links and stale references. 5. Separate user-facing docs gaps from maintainer-only improvements. 6. Produce a prioritized docs gap list. ## Safety rules - Do not publish docs, rewrite